Jacinda Ardern Creates a Totalitarian Regime on the Back of a Cold Virus


Barbara McKenzie

‘ the most dangerous bill that’s ever been placed in Parliament’, Brian Tamaki, Destiny Church
‘This Bill places unprecedented limits on rights and freedoms of association and movement‘, Nicola Willis, MP, speaking to the Bill.
‘This is a great failure of our democratic process. The new legislation [..] will result in sweeping police powers unseen in this country for many years’Paul Hunt, Chief Human Rights Commissioner
‘We are witnessing a totalitarian takeover of the world in real time, yet there are some people who still think this is about a virus‘, Tony Heller@Tony__Heller
‘This is a Bill that gives one person enormous power’, Simon O’Connor, MP, speaking to the Bill
‘Congratulations New Zealand. We are officially a police state’, Winston Smith@saltyreign

New Zealand will effectively be in a state of emergency for up to two Years

Under New Zealand law a state of emergency is something that must be reassessed week by week.  With the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act 2020 the government has created, in fact if not in name, a state of emergency that will last at least three months, with provision to be extended a number of times, up to a maximum period of two years (the original Bill specified a default period of two years).   Furthermore, Jacinda Ardern has already flagged that the country may return to the even more draconian restrictions of Level 3, entailing for example virtual house arrest for most of the population, if the number of cases (no matter how mild) rises again, see the video at bottom.

The original Bill specified a default period of two years, unless a conscious decision was made to shorten it through an Order in Council: this was only altered after amendments from the National and Act Parties.   Jacinda Ardern has already granted herself special powers with regard to immigration, to be in force for 12 months.

Jacinda Ardern has passed a bill that gives the government, the police and ‘authorised persons’ undreamed of powers to control the lives of New Zealand citizens, for up to two years.  All this is on the back of a disease that the New Zealand experience and a vast body of research show to be no different from any other seasonal virus, and milder than many.

‘The purpose of the Act is to support a public health response to COVID-19’

There is nothing in the Act that indicates why such a response is necessary – it is taken as read.

Bypassing due process

The government had seven weeks to prepare its measures for ‘coming out of the lockdown’.  However, it has continued the precedent it set with the gun legislation of choosing without justification to fast-track highly controversial legislation, with no select committee, and no consultation with the public.  Furthermore, no regulatory impact assessment has been carried out – the government has suspended regulatory impact assessments  for all ‘COVID-19 responses’  until 31 August 2020, by decree of Cabinet (not parliament).

The Act  gives the government extraordinary powers

The government can now legally make orders that limit freedom of association and of movement, require quarantining, require intrusive testing – even though there is no known reliable test for Covid-19 – and make decisions based on that unreliable testing.

An order may be made by the Minister or Director-General of Health to require a person to:

(i) stay in any specified place or refrain from going to any specified
(ii) refrain from associating with specified persons:
(iii) stay physically distant from any persons in any specified way:
(iv) refrain from travelling to or from any specified area:
(v) refrain from carrying out specified activities (for example, business
activities involving close personal contact) or require specified
activities to be carried out only in any specified way or in
compliance with specified measures:
(vi) be isolated or quarantined in any specified place or in any specified

(vii) refrain from participating in gatherings of any specified kind, in
any specified place, or in specified circumstances:
(viii) report for medical examination or testing in any specified way or
in any specified circumstances:
(ix) provide, in specified circumstances or in any specified way, any
information necessary for the purpose of contact tracing: (Section 11)

These powers also can be applied to ‘different classes of persons’ (section 12). An example of this would be permanently quarantining all those over 70 years of age ‘until a vaccine is available’, as mooted in the UK.

The Act can be easily amended to impose mandatory vaccination – Jacinda Ardern and her advisers constantly refers to a vaccine as the only solution to the ‘Covid crisis’. Coronavirus vaccines have been described as both  unnecessary and dangerous.  The vaccine against the so-called swine flu of 2009, led to severe neurological damage and lawsuits in the millions.  For this reason Bill Gates, who sponsors the pandemic projectand has extensive vaccine interests, is demanding indemnity for any Covid19 vaccine.

The Act gives the police, health officers and ‘authorised persons’ extraordinary powers, including powers of entry

‘State-sanctioned vigilantes’

‘The Director-General may authorise a suitably qualified and trained person […] to carry out any functions and powers of an enforcement officer under this Act.’  In his speech to the Bill, Simon O’Connor MP referred to such authorised persons as ‘state-sanctioned vigilantes [..]. They will have the power, not only to watch and report on what you do, but to shut you down’.

Any enforcement officer can enter place or vehicle without a warrant, with the exception of private dwellings, if they have ‘reasonable grounds’

‘An enforcement officer [ie a police officer, an employee of the health department, or any authorised person] may enter, without a warrant, any land, building, craft,
vehicle, place, or thing if they have reasonable grounds to believe that a person
is failing to comply with any aspect of a section 11 order.’

Police officers, but not other enforcement officers, can make a forced entry into private dwellings without a warrant (section 20).

‘(3) A constable may enter a private dwellinghouse without warrant only if they
have reasonable grounds to believe that people have gathered there in contravention
of a section 11 order and entry is necessary for the purpose of giving a
direction under section 21.
‘(4) A constable exercising a power of entry under this section may use reasonable
force in order to effect entry into or onto the land, building, craft, vehicle,
place, or thing if, following a request, a person present refuses entry or does
not allow entry within a reasonable time.’

Power to give directions to stop or carry out activity

‘An enforcement officer may direct a person to stop any activity that is contravening or likely to contravene the order or to take an action that ensures compliance with section 11’ (section 21)

Power to close roads and public places (section 22)

If a section 11 order provides, ‘a constable or an enforcement officer acting under the authority of the constable may totally or partially prohibit or restrict public access, with or without vehicles, to any road or public place in that area’.

‘Enforcement officers’ have the power to demand identifying information (section 23)


Non-compliance renders the culprit liable to a fine or imprisonment, e.g.

‘A person commits an offence if the person intentionally fails to comply with a
section 11 order.
(2) A person who commits an offence against subsection (1) is liable on conviction
(a) imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months; or
(b) a fine not exceeding $4,000.’

The government knows it’s a cold virus

Numerous eminent professors of virology, epidemiology, pulmonology etc have said from the beginning that this is just another seasonal virus; that the best strategy is to allow the healthy to develop natural immunity and protect the vulnerable – i.e. do what we’ve always done.  The response of Prof Alexander Kekulé, chair of Medical Microbiology and Virology of the Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, is typical – ‘Infect the young and protect others at risk’.

Assessments of the virus have continued to downgrade its lethality over the months as more information has come to light. A new antibody study with Danish blood donorsshows a very low Covid19 lethality (IFR) of 0.08% for persons under 70 years of age: a  new antibody study from Iran also shows lethality of 0.08% to 0.12%.

The early conclusion that the virus attacks people who are both old and ill, and that children are immune still holds good – there has not been a single reported instance of a child under 10 transmitting the virus, even in contact tracing carried out by WHO.

The New Zealand government has made it very clear that it is aware of the true nature of Covid19.  At the regular press briefings we are told (repeatedly):

Ashley Bloomfield (Director-General of Health) ‘As we have seen around the world, Covid-19 CAN be a deadly disease – particularly for older people, and those with underlying pre-existing health issues.’ (Bloomfield’s emphasis)

Jacinda Ardern (Prime Minister): ‘our older NZers, and those with underlying health issues, are BY FAR at the most risk.  It is critical that we all stay at home to give our older NZers as much protection as we possibly can.’ […] (Ardern’s emphasis)

Caroline McElnay (Director of Public Health): ‘As we have said previously, this can be a very serious disease, particularly for elderly people and also for those with underlying health conditions’.

So no more than a seasonal flu, which can be dangerous for those who are highly immune-compromised, who should be protected.

Considerable license is applied when it comes to determining whether a death is from Covid19.  This report given by Ashley Bloomfield at a ‘Daily COVID-19 media conference’ is typical (4:00 mins):

‘Sadly today, I have another Covid-19 related [sic] death to report. […] The person who passed away […] had underlying health conditions and was considered a probable case of Covid-19 due to her clinical presentation and past exposure history, despite testing negative.

The New Zealand experience of Covid19 confirms the scientific assessment:  the average age of the deceased is 80; all  had serious underlying health issues; many had advanced Alzheimers.  No caregiver has died from Covid19, nor any international traveller.  (International flights from Auckland, for example, are more than half of what they were a year ago – a traveller on an international Air New Zealand flight has reported that no social distancing is applied at all.)

The Hamburg experience has been similar to that of New Zealand: again, the average age is 80, and the deceased had multiple comorbidities.  Klaus Püschel, head of forensic medicine at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, and his team have been autopsying all the people who died in Hamburg in connection with the coronavirus. He has concluded that the hysteria over the coronavirus is ‘completely exaggerated’  as all fatalities he examined had serious previous illnesses which would have soon resulted in death with or without the virus.  There is no killer virus.’

It has been known for months that the sensational reports of mass numbers of deaths overseas have been grossly exaggerated. Administrations in countries such as Italy, the US, and the UK have had policies of declaring deaths to be Covid19 in case of any doubt – sometimes on the flimsiest basis.  Media reports have ignored local factors, such as Northern Italy’s high pollution rate (the highest in Europe), its problem with pulmonary disease, and its antibiotic resistance rate (again the highest in Europe) – data from the Italian authorities show that around 80% of the deceased were treated with antibiotics, indicating bacterial superinfections (the deaths would still be recorded as being due to coronavirus).

There is doubt whether anyone has died from Covid19.  Jacinda Ardern has declared what amounts to a two year state of emergency for something she knows to be nothing more than a seasonal virus.

The World Health Organisation is now hinting that Covid19 may not be eradicated, and that ‘countries may have to learn how to live with the virus even if a vaccine is developed’.   This will give Jacinda Ardern the justification, should she be re-elected, for continuing and further entrenching her totalitarian regime for as long as she remains in power.

See also:

Facts about Covid-19, which monitors and reports all new research and developments relating to the Covid19 project.

If You Want to Create a Totally False Panic About A Totally False Pandemic – Pick a Coronavirus

HR 6666: The Testing, Reaching and Contacting Everyone (TRACE) Act. Towards a Totalitarian State?

Faulty Coronavirus Kits Suspected as Goat and Fruit Test Positive in Tanzania



One thought on “Jacinda Ardern Creates a Totalitarian Regime on the Back of a Cold Virus

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *